The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1887-11-30
RAILROAD LAND GRANTS.
AN IMPORTANT FEATURE OF SEQ
RETARY LAMAR'S REPORT.

Enormous Abuses Caused by Congress
sional Concessions-Some Corpora
tions Given More Land than is Com
prised in Half Dozen of the Largest
and Most Populous States.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 29-One of the most
important features of Secretary Lamar's
forthcoming annual report is the part which
relates to the adjustment of railroad land
grants. In this part of his report the Secre-
tary says that soon after his appointment to
his present position he "became convinced
that the administration of Congressional
grants of lands to railroads had given rise to
enormous abuses. Congress had not only
made grants which, in some instances, OK
ceeded in extent the area of half dozen of
the largest and most populous States of the
Union, but in addition provided that any
losses of lands within the granted limits
should be satisfied by selections of lands
within other and adjoining limits, thus
nearly doubling the area of the original
grants.
HELD IN RESERVE.
Thus enormous quantities of public
lands were held in reservation to await the
convenience of the respective corporations
in the construction of their roads, selections
of its lands, and uncertain adjustments of
grants by the department. Years have
elapsed since many of the grants have been
made, and other years since the with
drawals. Some of the companies have
constructed the entire line Of their roads,
Others fragmentary portions only and others
again none at all: but the Withdrawals of
lands were not,less effective as a barrier
against settlers in one case than in the other.
1t mattered not what might be the equities
acquired by years of toll upon what he be-
lieved to be part of the national domain. 1t
was required by the highest judicial tri-
bunal, as expounded by the highest law
officers of the Executive, that withdrawal
once made by competent authority, was
legal and effective to exclude all from in
trusion within its limits
THE MILLER CASE.
Zone such case, where hardship and in
justice were about to be inflicted under the
law, came under your observation. Gull
ford Miller settled upon lands afterward
selected and claimed by the Northern Pa
cific Railroad Company to be a case of with
drawal for indemnity purposes. Some
doubt arising as to the legality of the with
drawal, the case was referred by this de-
partment to the Attorney General for his
opinion on the question of law. This office
held that the withdrawal was legal and that
during its existence Miller could acquire no
right or title to the tract claimed by him
and on which he lived. Whilst recognizing
the correctness of the law, you saw the in
justice of the case so far as the individual
settler was affected, and that hundreds of
others were similarly situated who might
and would be affected and you directed
that such grants should be so administered
by this department as, if possible, to protect
these settlers from such injustice, stating
your belief that this can be done under the
provision which declared that these selec-
tions shall be made under direction of the
Secretary Of the Interior.
SURVEYS DELAYED.
After years of waiting Congress had
failed to empower the department to make
the necessary surveys whereby some of the
grants might be adjusted and no immediate
prospect of such surveys was in sight. But
law was passed March 3, 1887, whereby
the Secretary of the Interior was directed
to Immediately adjust each of the railroad
lanl grants made by Congress to aid in the
construction of railroads. With an earnest
desire to obey the mandate of Congress to
give to corporations their every right under
the laws, and at the same time follow the
directions given by you to see that ample
protection should be extended to settlers and
those seeking to make settlement on the
and SO utterly overshadowed), / entered
upon most careful consideration of the
whole subject OF the history and the
law relating to the land grants, and con-
cluded that if the department was clothed
with authority to make indemnity with
drawals as had been done in many instances,
exercise of that authority was a matter en-
tirely within sound discretion, and not
matter of legal obligation in any respect,
that the same sound dissertation which in
the interest of the companies, justified
said Withdrawals now demand peremptorily
in the public interest speedy revocation Of
the same, and that the most effecti ye way
of expediting the adjustment of land grants
and doing exact justice to the companies,
and guarding and promoting the interest of
settlers also, was to permit the public to
enter into competition with the companies
in the selection of lands heretofore with
drawn for indemnity purposes.
THE COMPANIES NOTIFIED.
Accordingly, on May 81, 1887, with your
approval, rules were laid upon the different
companies for whose benefit the withdrawal
had been made to show cause by certain
day why said Withdrawals should not be re-
voked. On Aug. 13, 1887, my views were
fully expressed in decision rendered in the
case of the Atlantic and Pacific Railroad
Company, which, by answer and argument,
raised nearly all the objections that were
presented in part only by number of other
companies Two days later orders withdraw
ing lands within the indemnity limits and re-
serving the same for settlement were re-
voked and the lands restored to the public
domain and to settlement. The amount of
land restored to the public domain through
orders revoking indemnity withdrawal is
stated by the Commissioner OF the General
Land Office to be q 323 600 acres